[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug #32888: The old `base' package.

On Tue, Mar 09, 1999 at 07:12:06PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 09, 1999 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > I'm trying to understand what kind of harm does the existence of the base
> > package which has to be considered as a "bug".
> > 
> > Is there a technical reason why we should make "base" to disappear
> > from old systems?
> > 
> > Is there any reason to make "base" to disappear other than aesthetical?
> I'm trying to understand what kind of harm the existence of the old,
> obsolete X font and static library packages cause which necessitates
> their consideration as "bugs".

Do the old static library packages still work?

Hamish Moffatt VK3TYD              hamish@debian.org, hamish@rising.com.au
Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5
CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome.   http://hamish.home.ml.org

Attachment: pgps_ZTlTko9y.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: